(28-03-2013 01:41 AM)DeepThought Wrote: My Speculation: One gripe I have about the Curiosity rover science kit is that they didn't include a means to detect evidence of life. Main reason probably was that it would be too controversial given the political influence of the American Christian right.

Heywood: Your speculation is wrong! Admit it!

Me: Your opinion doesn't matter to me.

Heywood: Your speculation is offensive... how dare you!

Me: Well blow me.

I was content with what I already said and intended to just forget about commenting further in this thread.....but Okay, I'll bite at your troll bait.

Your butthurt because you don't agree with the science kit put on Curiosity. You need someone to blame and since those NASA scientist are smarter than you, you couldn't get away with blaming them. So you go after religious right....this is an atheist forum so its not like they will gets lot of support. This is your big chance to pin another baseless accusation on them.

I have to break your atheotard bubble. Even if Curiosity had a microscope, it is very unlikely it would detect microbial life. If life exists today on mars it will exist where the liquid water mars exists(if liquid water still exists on mars).....which is deep underground. Its true that curiosity has a drill, but that can only go maybe an inch or two...not nearly deep enough to have any hope of exposing liquid water.

The reason there is no microscope is not because of the religious right as you ridiculously assert...its because there was a payload limit and other instruments were determined to provide more scientific value. Its as simple as that. You can put your crackpt conspiracy theory away.

(28-03-2013 02:46 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote: I was content with what I already said and intended to just forget about commenting further in this thread.....but Okay, I'll bite at your troll bait.

Your butthurt because you don't agree with the science kit put on Curiosity. You need someone to blame and since those NASA scientist are smarter than you, you couldn't get away with blaming them. So you go after religious right....this is an atheist forum so its not like they will gets lot of support. This is your big chance to pin another baseless accusation on them.

I have to break your atheotard bubble. Even if Curiosity had a microscope, it is very unlikely it would detect microbial life. If life exists today on mars it will exist where the liquid water mars exists(if liquid water still exists on mars).....which is deep underground. Its true that curiosity has a drill, but that can only go maybe an inch or two...not nearly deep enough to have any hope of exposing liquid water.

The reason there is no microscope is not because of the religious right as you ridiculously assert...its because there was a payload limit and other instruments were determined to provide more scientific value. Its as simple as that. You can put your crackpt conspiracy theory away.

The whole area was once covered with water. Microscope probably isn't the best or only way to detect life but it might detect evidence of life. Fossils of bacteria?

There is water within drill depth according to DAN data.

As for the rest... I'm not going to respond to a strawman of myself. I do think you took that little comment a little too seriously though. You know what speculation means?

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss

(28-03-2013 02:46 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote: I was content with what I already said and intended to just forget about commenting further in this thread.....but Okay, I'll bite at your troll bait.

Your butthurt because you don't agree with the science kit put on Curiosity. You need someone to blame and since those NASA scientist are smarter than you, you couldn't get away with blaming them. So you go after religious right....this is an atheist forum so its not like they will gets lot of support. This is your big chance to pin another baseless accusation on them.

I have to break your atheotard bubble. Even if Curiosity had a microscope, it is very unlikely it would detect microbial life. If life exists today on mars it will exist where the liquid water mars exists(if liquid water still exists on mars).....which is deep underground. Its true that curiosity has a drill, but that can only go maybe an inch or two...not nearly deep enough to have any hope of exposing liquid water.

The reason there is no microscope is not because of the religious right as you ridiculously assert...its because there was a payload limit and other instruments were determined to provide more scientific value. Its as simple as that. You can put your crackpt conspiracy theory away.

The whole area was once covered with water. Microscope probably isn't the best or only way to detect life but it might detect evidence of life. Fossils of bacteria?

There is water within drill depth according to DAN data.

As for the rest... I'm not going to respond to a strawman of myself. I do think you took that little comment a little too seriously though. You know what speculation means?

Yeah I know what speculation means. Right now I am speculating that you hate the religious right so much, that they've become your boogeyman.

Anyways you are confusing water with liquid water. If curiosity is capable of uncovering water, its going to be in the form if ice. If life currently exist on mars, its going to be where liquid water exists....which is deep underground(if it exists at all). Also it would take a pretty heavy duty microscope, perhaps an electron microscope to detect fossilized bacteria. We have a difficult time doing that on earth, it would be exceedingly difficult on mars.

(28-03-2013 01:34 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote: Yeah I know what speculation means. Right now I am speculating that you hate the religious right so much, that they've become your boogeyman.

Anyways you are confusing water with liquid water. If curiosity is capable of uncovering water, its going to be in the form if ice. If life currently exist on mars, its going to be where liquid water exists....which is deep underground(if it exists at all). Also it would take a pretty heavy duty microscope, perhaps an electron microscope to detect fossilized bacteria. We have a difficult time doing that on earth, it would be exceedingly difficult on mars.

Glad you understand speculation. I don't hate the religious right. I think allot of them are crazy and see it more on a case by case basis.

I know it will be ice water. I'm aware of temperature on Mars. Even on mars under certain conditions water near the surface will become liquid for a while (depending on its position in orbit etc..).

On earth we have plenty of bacteria that live in frozen conditions. Why do people get taught not to freeze food (especially meat) more than once? By refreezing something you are selecting for bacteria that live in the cold and give them a chance to quickly spread.
There are bacteria on Earth that have something like antifreeze in the cytoplasm/cytosol. The cold will not kill them. The chemical reactions are slowed down considerably in the cold.

An electron microscope isn't needed to see bacteria. Anything greater than 1000x magnification would do the job.

Allot of the science equipment in curiosity is many generations ahead of the commercially available equipment. The stuff the SAM and CHEMIN instruments do normally requires several machines the size of microwave ovens and larger. The CHEMCAM device is ~10 generations ahead of any device around to date. Normally what CHEMCAM does requires another machine the size of a microwave oven - though this takes far away samples with a laser. This is made possible when you spend over 1 billion. I'd say a small electron microscope is possible but it probably wouldn't be the best way to go about it.

I'm not qualified to say how it would be done and neither are you. There is enough scientific consensus to justify at least a minimal effort at finding life.. or extant life.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss